Synology DS416play vs QNAP TS-453A and DS916 for home multimedia purposes

Tdmitry

Honorable
Sep 12, 2013
57
0
10,640
Guys, what do ya'll think - are the last two worth extra 150-200$ for usual 1080p movies and 1 Gb LAN network?

At this point I'm changin my DS215j because of need in a little bit nore powerfull and promt NAS, and, as well, retardish PLEX that requires "enough" CPU power to transcode video to my TV (But actually that's nonsense, cuz movies I have uploaded are ALREADY encoded properly). And, predicting all the questions - yup, PLEX is the only app that transfers movies on smart TV without freezes.

Anyway, my feelings about proper NAS perfomance are little bit obscure, because of far more advanced knowleges in PC - will DS416play be enough for home (1-2 persons, 10 TB max) enough for general network attached storage uses?
 
Solution
DS414 if I remember right (I'm at work right now). As just a fileserver, for just my personal use no other users, it's great. But actually trying to run something intensive like PLEX natively on that hardware is terrible.

Those 'play' versions of units are supposedly rigged to work better for what you are trying to do, but I've never actually heard anyone say it made a real difference. So I'm not sure its anything other than marketing.

As for OS QNAP is substantially better these days. Back when I got my NAS Synology OS was by far the best but QNAP really improved since then so its really not much of a selling point these days as they are largely the same now.

Another point the QNAP has way more RAM onboard, 4 GB, (and can be...
well the Qnap is the more powerful unit out of the ones you listed, with a Celeron 4 core. The other (I assume you meant DS416 not DS916+) is using an ARM dual core. So it's actually weaker than that DS416play.

I have an older model of the DS416, and it works fine for me. But I do not transcode anything on it, PLEX brings it to its knees. Frankly in the future when it finally dies I'll upgrade to something more like the QNAP TS-453A so I can run PLEX natively on it instead of having my desktop do it.
 

Tdmitry

Honorable
Sep 12, 2013
57
0
10,640
No, I've meant DS916 :)

And about DS416play - it has x64 Celeron (atom kind) CPU, but only 2cores. On other hand, I beleive DSM works faster, OS itself is easier to operate with, so Synology offers the same level of abilities with much more cheapaer and weaker hardware.

But actually, in case of 416play vs TS-453, both have almost the same CPU's, Celeron 3060 vs 3150-3170. Saying the same, I mean that any atom based CPU IS actually the same, judjing from position of i7 user - so I don't think it actually gonna make alot of difference.

But still, I am confused a little.

And do you have DS415(414, etc.) or older "play" version?
 
DS414 if I remember right (I'm at work right now). As just a fileserver, for just my personal use no other users, it's great. But actually trying to run something intensive like PLEX natively on that hardware is terrible.

Those 'play' versions of units are supposedly rigged to work better for what you are trying to do, but I've never actually heard anyone say it made a real difference. So I'm not sure its anything other than marketing.

As for OS QNAP is substantially better these days. Back when I got my NAS Synology OS was by far the best but QNAP really improved since then so its really not much of a selling point these days as they are largely the same now.

Another point the QNAP has way more RAM onboard, 4 GB, (and can be expanded to 8 GB) compared to both the Synology's that are fixed at 1 GB with no expansion possible.

PLEX has this nice spreadsheet for NAS devices it will work on and a generic note on how well it will work. https://support.plex.tv/hc/en-us/articles/201373803-NAS-Compatibility-List
 
Solution